Abstract
The flux and transmission of protein A during microfiltration have been studied. We studied the performance of two commercial membranes: one made of nylon (Pall Ultipore Nylon66, 0.2 µm) and one of polyether sulfone (Pall Omega, 0.16 µm). The Nylon66 membrane had by far the best transmission of protein A although a previous study showed that bovine serum albumin (BSA), often used to characterize membranes, had much better transmission through the Omega membrane. The membrane manufacturer also states that the Omega membrane is the best membrane for this kind of application because it is a low-protein-binding membrane. The lower transmission of the Omega membrane for protein A was assumed to be owing to its smaller pores and higher charge density in combination with the larger Stokes radius for protein A. When the pH was lowered, the Nylon66 membrane still had the higher transmission. It can thus be concluded that a membrane that is found suitable for the recovery process of one protein is not always the best choice for the recovery process for other proteins even though the membrane is low protein binding.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Heinemann, P., Howell, J. A., and Bryan, R. A. (1988), Desalination 68, 243–250.
Bowen, W. R. and Gan, Q. (1991), Biotechnol. Bioeng. 38, 688–696.
Palecek, S. P. and Zydney, A. L. (1994), J. Membr. Sci. 95, 71–81.
Kelly, S. T. and Zydney, A. L. (1994), Biotechnol. Bioeng. 44, 972–982.
Tracy, E. M. and Davis, R. H. (1994), J. Colloid Interface Sci. 167, 104–116.
Palecek, S. P., Mochizuki, S., and Zydney, A. L. (1993), Desalination 90, 147–159.
Nakamura, K. and Matsumoto, K. (1998), J. Chem. Eng. Japan 31(4), 536–544.
Persson, A., Jönsson, A.-S., and Zacchi, G. (2003), J. Membrane Sci. 223, 11–21.
Frenander, U. and Jönsson, A.-S. (1996), Biotechnol. Bioeng. 52, 397–403.
Godfrey, M. A. J. (1997), Immunoaffinity and IgG receptor technologies, in Affinity Separations: A Practical Approach, Matejtschuk, P., ed., Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, pp. 141–195.
Björk, I., Petersson, B.-Å., and Sjöquist, J. (1972), Eur. J. Biochem. 29, 579–584.
Paulsson, C. (2000), Report no. LUTKDH/(TKKA-5014)/1-29(2000), Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Iwasaki, K.-I., Nakajima, M., and Sasahara, H. (1991), J. Ferment. Bioeng. 72(5), 373–378.
Field, R. W., Wu, D., Howell, J. A., and Gupta, B. B. (1995), J. Membr. Sci. 100, 259–272.
Howell, J. A. (1995), J. Membr. Sci. 107, 165–171.
Chen, V., Fane, A. G., Madaeni, S., and Wenten, I. G. (1997), J. Membr. Sci. 125, 109–122.
Chen, V. (1998), J. Membr. Sci. 147, 265–278.
Li, H., Fane, A. G., Coster, H. G. L., and Vigneswaran, S. (1998), J. Membr. Sci. 149, 83–97.
Wu, D., Howell, J. A., and Field, R. W. (1999), J. Membr. Sci. 152, 89–98.
Persson, A., Jönsson, A.-S., and Zacchi, G. (2001), Biotechnol. Bioeng. 72(3), 269–277.
Toräng, A., Jönsson, A.-S., and Zacchi, G. (1999), Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 76, 143–157.
Ikeda, S. and Nishinari, K. (2000), Biomacromolecules 1, 757–763.
Palecek, S. P. and Zydney, A. L. (1994), Biotechnol. Prog. 10, 207–213.
Güell, C. and Davis, R. H. (1996), J. Membr. Sci. 119, 269–284.
Franken, A. C. M., Sluys, J. T. M., Chen, V., Fane, A. G., and Fell, C. J. D. (1990), in Proceedings of the 5th World Filtration Congress Nice, vol. 1, Société Française de Filtration, Cachan, France, pp. 207–213.
Mueller, J. and Davis, R. H. (1996), J. Membr. Sci. 116, 47–60.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Persson, A., Jönsson, AS. & Zacchi, G. Use of microfiltration as first step in recovery of protein a from fermentation broth. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 112, 151–162 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1385/ABAB:112:3:151
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1385/ABAB:112:3:151